IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

W.P. No. /2020

BETWEEN

Sri. H. S .Doreswamy & other …PETITIONER

AND

The state of Karnataka and other ……..RESPONDENTS

LIST OF DATES

Sl

No

Date

1 18.12.2019 Prohibitory orders were issued by Respondent

No. 3 under section 144 of the CrPC, which

was effective from 9:00 p.m. on 18.12.2019 to

20.12.2019.

2 19.12.2019

12.30 Noon

Unarmed and peaceful people gathered at the

DC office in Mangalore.

3 19.12.2019

2 PM

Respondent Police started indiscriminate

lathi-charge on people gathered peacefully at

DC Office.

4 19.12.2019

3 PM

Various people who were injured by the action

of the Respondent No-3 were admitted at

Wenlock Hospital and Highland hospital.

5 19.12.2019

3 PM

Respondent No-3 visited the DC Office circle,

and it can be seen in a video clipping he was

instructing the fellow policeman in Hindi that

"don't catch just beat."

6 19.12.2019

4-40PM

The 2nd Petitioner, being ex-mayor of the city

of Mangalore and current ward member of the

area, was called by the Police Commissioner

at around 4:40 p.m. to come to the scene of

the protest. The 2nd Petitioner met with the

police chief of Mangalore near Ibrahim

Khaleel mosque, but the 2nd Petitioner was

himself injured by the Police while trying to

help innocent persons who were trapped in

the commotion.

7 19.12.2019

4.50 to 5

PM

Two People were killed due to intentional firing

by the Respondent No-3.

8 19.12.2019 The Police had visited the 2nd Petitioner at

Unity Hospital to take his statement, and he

narrated the entire incident of how he was

injured, but subsequently, he had discovered

that though his information which constitutes

cognizable offense the police authorities were

not registered an FIR.

9 19.12.2019

5.30 to

6 PM

The armed police entered the Highland

hospital, including the ICU with fully armed

without obliging the instructions of the hospital

authority. These armed Police thereafter

attacked people inside premises and fired tear

gas shells, which has caused tremendous

hardship to the patients of the hospital.

10 19.12.2019

to

27.12.2019

Several FIRs have been lodged against

unknown people. Some of the FIR's are

registered against "Unknown Muslim youth,"

including the two persons who were shot dead

in the gunfire of the police, whereas no

complaints have been registered by the

Police, which is against them.

11 28.12.2019 The 2nd Petitioner has submitted his complaint

to the police, but so far, no FIR has been

lodged by the Police.

12 02.01.2020 Police have issued an endorsement to the 2nd

Petitioner that his complaint will be

investigated in Cr No:133/2019 of Mangalore

North Police Station.

SYNOPSIS

1. It is submitted that the enactment of the Citizenship Amendment

Act, 2019 (CAA, 2010), has brought divisive attitude across the

political spectrum wherein protest for and against the said law has

been held all over the country. The country has been in turmoil

with every state and union territory, except few, has engaged in

rampant public engagement both for and against the enactment of

the said law. In many parts of the country, including Karnataka,

such protests have led to the death of citizens in Karnataka, Uttar

Pradesh and other parts of the country.

2. It is submitted that after the enactment of the CAA, 2019 students

of 40 reputed Universities have protested against the said Bill, as

per media reports. Furthermore, several protests have been held

throughout the country even in the city of Bengaluru on 19.12.2019

3. It is submitted that since the Respondent has invoked the provision

of Section 144 of Cr.P.C., did not take sufficient measure in order

to de-escalate the situation in spite of knowing about the protest

being held in the city but instead had taken an active role to teach

a lesson to the protestors by using excessive force on them which

has led injuries to various people and also death of 2 civilians.

4. It is submitted that the conduct of the police on 19.12.2019 at

Mangalore, as revealed from video footages, clearly shows the

illegal and atrocious manner in which the police have acted against

not only people who have gathered peacefully and un-armed but

also against innocent bystanders and specifically the attack on the

mosque by police, where they resorted to throwing stones and

objects, available on the ground also reveals the partisan

approach of the police where the police have specifically targeted

minorities. It is also submitted that the police had abetted and

provided the protection to the people who went and ransacked the

shops and also thrown stones at shops and people in the area.

5. It is submitted that the police had actively hunted down various

people and tortured them on the street isolating individuals from

the crowd and, thereafter, thrashing them with lathis and other

means, which indicates the extent of excessive force used by the

police even before they started the gunfire.

6. It is submitted that at around 4:30 to 5.P.M., when gunfire was

inflicted upon people, it has led to the death of two persons and

gravely injured several others who were neither armed nor

provoked the police, which had warranted such an action.

7. It is submitted that subsequent to the event on 19.12.2019 as

deliberated herein. The police had targeted people on social media

platforms in order to implicate, intimidate, and threaten the people

from raising even legitimate concerns against the action of the

police.

8. It is submitted that the 2nd Petitioner was called by the Police

officials at around 4:40 p.m. to help the police by accompanying

them to talk to the protestors. It is submitted that the 2nd Petitioner

accompanied the police to the Ibrahim Khaleel mosque.

Thereafter, the 2nd Petitioner was attacked by the police. As a

result, the 2nd Petitioner was unconscious, and he was taken to

hospital and was admitted at the Unity Hospital Mangalore.

9. It is submitted that, while the 2nd Petitioner was taking treatment

as an in-patient, Police officials recorded the statement; however,

no action has been taken on the statement provided by the 2nd

Petitioner. Subsequently, the 2nd Petitioner filed a complaint

through registered post to the Station House Officer Bandar,

Mangalore North, on 28.12.2019, but no FIR has been lodged on

the basis of his complaint.

10. It is also submitted that the Petitioners had come to know through

video footages recorded by the Journalist and from the various

people who faced the brunt of the Police action on that day

described that the Police attacked the students and innocent

bystanders who were waiting for their bus at the Hamilton circle,

State Bank bus stop with lathis.

11. It is submitted that subsequent to the aforesaid horrific event that

occurred on 19.12.2019 which has led to death of two persons

namely Abdul Jaleel and Nouseen Yane, but no FIR has been

lodged against the police authorities, but 32 FIR has been filed

against unknown persons by the police under various section of

the IPC and KPDLP Act.

12. It is also submitted that a close perusal of these complaints would

reveal that there are no complaints against the police personnel

for injury caused to persons due to police firing or lathi charge.

However, the same was inflicted indiscriminately towards

protesters and bystanders alike. Furthermore, it can also be

observed that the Police have targeted online groups who have

specifically voiced their concerns against the Citizenship

Amendment Act, 2019.

13. The Petitioners being public-spirited persons after hearing various

people's statements about this incident and also perused various

visuals available on electronic media and social media, prefers this

instant petition.

Place: Bangalore

Date: Advocate for Petitioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT

BENGALURU

W.P. No. /2020 (P.I.L)

(Original Jurisdiction)

BETWEEN

...PETITIONER

AND

1. State of Karnataka

Represented by its Chief Secretary

VidhanaSoudha

Bangalore 5600001

2. State of Karnataka

Represented by its Principal Secretary

Home Department

VidhanaSoudha

Bangalore 560001

3. Office of Commissioner of Police,

Mangalore City Police

Pandeshwar, Mangalore

Karnataka 575001 ....RESPONDENTS

MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 and

227 of THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1950

The Petitioner above named most respectfully submits as follows:

1. The addresses of the Petitioners and the Respondents for the

purpose of service of notice, summons etc., are as stated in the

cause title.

2. The first Petitioner is the freedom fighter who got inspired by the

reading book "My Early Life" by Mahatma Gandhi and joined the

Indian National Freedom Movement. The 1st Petitioner was part of

the Quit India Movement in the year 1942. The 1st Petitioner is an

active participant in social activities to explore the ideas of

democratizing socialism to meet the object envisaged in the

preamble to the Indian Constitution. The 1st Petitioner has

participated in the number of social movements led by the peoples

of the Karnataka against the corruption, environmental issues, and

other anti-people legislation and policies of the government. In

2014, the Petitioner spearheaded the anti-land grabbing protests

in Bangalore. The 2nd Petitioner served as a Mayor of Mangalore

city Municipality from 2005 to 2006. The 2nd Petitioner also served

as a member of the Municipal Corporation, Mangalore, for three

consecutive terms starting from 1997 to 2012.

3. The Petitioners are before this court in public interest, and in order

to expose the atrocities committed by the Police on December 19,

2019, in the wake of protests happening against the Citizen

Amendment Act, 2019 enacted by the Parliament of India, wherein

the Petitioner himself along with several persons have been

attacked, and two persons have been killed due to police firing at

the crowd of protestors on 19.12.2019 at Mangalore, prefers this

instant pubic Interest petition. The brief facts of this instant petition

are as follows:

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

4. It is submitted that the enactment of the Citizenship Amendment

Act, 2019 (CAA, 2010), has brought divisive attitude across the

political spectrum wherein protest for and against the said law has

been held all over the country. The country has been in turmoil

with every state and union territory, except few, has engaged in

rampant public engagement both for and against the enactment of

the said law. In many parts of the country, including Karnataka,

such protests have led to the death of citizens in Karnataka, Uttar

Pradesh and other parts of the country.

5. It is submitted that after the enactment of the CAA, 2019, students

of 40 universities have protested against the said Bill, as per media

reports. Furthermore, several protests have been held throughout

the country, even in the city of Bengaluru on 19.12.2019. However,

all the protests in Bangalore and another part of Karnataka except

Mangalore were peaceful.

6. It is submitted that Respondent No. 3, the Commissioner of Police,

Mangalore City, had issued prohibitory orders on 18.12.2019,

which were effective from 9 p.m. on 18.12.2019 to midnight of

20.12.2019. It is submitted that the said notification spoke of the

emergent crisis and chaos that permeated throughout the country

due to the incidents that took place at Jamia Muslim University in

Delhi between the students and the Police. A copy of the said order

is produced herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-A.

7. It is submitted herein that though the Respondent in-spite of

having knowledge that prohibitory orders under section 144 of the

CrPC has not taken sufficient measures to diffuse the situations

but instead had taken an active role to escalate the problem in the

region by using excessive force on them which has led to killing of

innocent persons according to media reports.

8. It is submitted that on 19.12.2019 approximately around 12:30

p.m., in a largely leaderless unarmed 100-odd youngsters who are

unarmed peacefully sat in front of the DC office – with a few of

them talking on the microphone about rights, accusing the Union

government of destroying the constitutional values, and

demanding that government authorities should not implement CAA

and NRC. At around 1:30 p.m. to 1:40 p.m. additional police forces

were brought in to the scene of the protests.

9. It is submitted that these protesters who had assembled at the DC

Office are unarmed and very peaceful. However, without proper

intimation and all of a sudden at around 2 PM, Police began lathi-

charge indiscriminately on these gatherings who were unarmed

and peaceful. It can be seen from the CCTV images and also the

various camera to disperse the crowd, many of the protestors and

even ordinary bystanders (waiting for the buses) near the DC’s

office are seen rushing from DC’s office either towards adjacent

Nellikai Road or towards Lady Goshen Hospital. Copy of these

video clippings are produced in CD and marked as ANNEXURE-

B.

10. It is submitted that the 3rd Respondent visited the DC Office circle

at around 3 PM, and he can be heard speaking in Hindi in a video

clipping that “Pakadna Math Sirf Maro."

11. It is further submitted that one Mr. Muzair, a member of the local

peace committee along with a few leaders, contacted Mangaluru

Police Commissioner and requested the commissioner to direct

the police to stop the Lathi-charge immediately. They would also

request people to stay indoors. These people also made several

announcements by using loud-speakers available at Mosque.

12. It is submitted that around 3:30 p.m. to 3:45 p.m., the 2nd Petitioner

was at home, got a call from a person near Highland Hospital who

told the 2nd Petitioner that many children were injured by lathi-

charge and were being admitted to Highland Hospital. The 2nd

Petitioner was also asked to come to Highland Hospital

immediately, as it was the situation of panic and distress. The 2nd

Petitioner immediately rushed to the hospital with two other

persons and met with injured due to lathi-charge by the Police

authorities, who were admitted in the said hospital. As the 2nd

Petitioner was there in Highland Hospital, he received another

phone call from one of his associates who were present in

Wenlock Hospital, and the 2nd Petitioner was informed that some

more injured persons were getting admitted in the said hospital.

Immediately, the 2nd Petitioner rushed to the Wenlock Hospital with

several other persons in a car. Once he reached there, the 2nd

Petitioner saw some more persons were trying to be admitted in

the said hospital who were injured by lathi charge. The 2nd

Petitioner pleaded to the hospital administration to arrange

facilities to admit the injured persons in private hospitals for

immediate medical attention to all the injured persons since, at that

time, the 2nd Petitioner noticed that even more injured persons

coming to the said hospital.

13. It is submitted that moments later, the 2nd Petitioner’s associates

CM Musthafa Received a call on his mobile number 9448550025

at around 4.40 PM from mobile number 98345585750 who

introduced himself as Varun Staff to the office of the 3rd

Respondent. Through this phone, the 2nd Petitioner spoke to

Commissioner, and the 2nd Petitioner requested the commissioner

to stop lathi charge on innocent people. At that time, Respondent

No. 3 asked the 2nd Petitioner to come to the place of incident

where the Police had lathi-charged the crowd. When the 2nd

Petitioner reached the spot, Commissioner suggested that they

should go to the place of the incident by department vehicle and

address the agitated persons and de-escalate the situation, but

immediately Respondent No. 3 changed his mind against it.

14. It is submitted that the Petitioner, along with some of the people,

decided to request the people to disburse and go back home. The

2nd Petitioner was also making an attempt to request the

Commissioner to stop the firing and Lathi charge, but they did not

pay any heed to his request; instead, he was also got a significant

blow on his head by the Police.

15. Subsequently, it is submitted that friends of the 2nd Petitioner

admitted the 2nd Petitioner in the Mangalore Unity Hospital. It is

submitted that while the 2nd Petitioner was taking treatment as an

in-patient; Police officials came and took his statements, and he

had narrated the entire incidents to them, but afterward, when he

inquired, he learned that no action was taken on the basis of his

statement. Subsequently, the 2nd Petitioner filed a complaint

through registered post to the Station House Officer Bandar,

Mangalore North, on 28.12.2019, but no FIR has been lodged on

the basis of his complaint. Copy of the complaint and postal

acknowledgment are produced and marked as ANNEXURE-C.

16. It is submitted that on 19.12.2019 at around 4:50 to 5:00 pm the

Police officers continue to fire at the people and the police people

were also seen in the various video clippings played in electronic

media and social media beating indiscriminately whomever they

found on the way including the people who have taken shelter in

their shops. Copy of these video clippings are already produced

and marked as ANNEXURE-B

17. It is further submitted that in these videos is can also be seen, and

the conversation can also be head in which one Police Inspector

Shantaram Kunder addressing at other police people who have

gathered at Mangalore North (Bunder) Police Station in Kannada

said “Though we fired so many rounds why no one has died”

where shooting took place that though they have fired so many

rounds no one died. It can also be seen in the video that the police

are asking to fire to the private part of the people. Copy of this

video is also produced along with this petition and already marked

as ANNEXURE-B.

18. It is also submitted that various video footage it can be seen that

the Police had attacked the students who were at the bus stand

and innocent bystanders who were waiting for their bus at the

Hamilton circle, State Bank bus stop with lathis indiscriminately. It

can also be seen that the Police have chased various people and

beating them in the middle of the streets. Various video clips

disclose that the Police have ransacked the shops and beaten the

people in the shops and also destroyed the shops.

19. It is submitted that various video clips also disclose that there are

un-uniformed people along with the police that can be seen

throwing stones and also attacking shops; however, the police who

were present at that spot did nothing to prevent them from doing

the same. This video clipping discloses that these private people

have the full support of the police to act whatever they wanted.

This copy of the video clipping is also already produced and

marked as ANNEXURE-B.

20. It is submitted that the Police have continued to target the fleeing

people even at the hospital. The armed police entered the

Highland hospital between 5.30 PM to 6 PM, where the injured

were admitted. The Police not only entered the hospital, including

the ICU, with fully armed without obliging the instructions of the

hospital authority. These armed Police thereafter attacked people

inside premises and fired tear gas shells, which has caused

tremendous hardship to the patients of the hospital. This copy of

the video clipping is also already produced and marked as

ANNEXURE-B.

21. It is submitted that subsequent to the aforesaid horrific event that

occurred on 19.12.2019, which has led to the death of two

persons, namely Abdul Jaleel and Nouseen Yane, and various

people got injured. Still, no FIR has been lodged against the police

officials involved in this case. However, though the NHRC

guidelines mandate that the FIR should be booked against the

policemen involved in the firing, no FIRs have been registered

against them by the Jurisdictional Police. It is important to

mention that though the law mandate that the FIR should be

booked against the official involved in not against the dead person.

The Respondent police have resisted a case against the dead

person in Cr No:133/2019 by Mangalore North Police station

showing the deceased persons are as accused in Sl. No. 3 and Sl

No. 8, for offences punishable u/s 143, 147, 148, 188, 341, 427,

353, 332, 307, 149 of IPC& u/s 2(A), 2(B) KPDLP Act. Copy of the

NHRC revised guidelines and the copy of the FIR are produced

and marked as ANNEXURE-D & ANNEXURE- E, respectively.

22. However, there are the Respondent Police have registered about

32 FIR's in connection with the incident dated 19.12.2019 at

Mangalore city. It is pertinent to mention that the some of the FIR's

which have been registered by the Responded police are against

unknown persons by referring in the Colum no 6 of the FIR as

“unknown Muslim youth” and also mentioned the number of

persons. It is brought to the notice of this Hon'ble Court that the

some of the FIR in which the Respondent Police have invoked

section 124A is registered against social media groups and mobile

numbers as an accused person in Colum no 6 of FIR. It is

submitted that the complainants in most of the FIR’s are police

personnel. A gist of the FIR is reproduced in the table produced

hereby with this writ petition, and the same is marked as

ANNEXURE-F. Copies of the FIR are also produced hereby, and

they are marked as ANNEXURE-G1 TO G31 Collectively.

23. It is also submitted that a close perusal of the complaints would

reveal that there are no complaints against the police personnel

for injury caused to persons due to police firing or lathi charge.

However, the same was inflicted indiscriminately towards

protesters and bystanders alike. Furthermore, it can also be

observed that the Police have targeted online groups who have

specifically voiced their concerns against the Citizenship

Amendment Act, 2019. Copy of the complaint filed by various

injured persons and photographs of the injured are produced and

marked as ANNEXURE-H1 TO H Collectively.

24. It is submitted that these police violence, including beating up the

innocent people and damaging the public property and stone-

pelting, are recorded by the various newspapers and also police

personal. Some of these incidents are also recorded in the

available CCTV’s of the locality, which shows lighter on the details

of the incidents. Copy of the Photographs are produced and

marked as ANNEXURE -J Collectively.

25. It is submitted that similar violence has also taken place in Uttar

Pradesh and Delhi. In the case of violence that occurred in Uttar

Pradesh, the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad has converted a

letter into a Public Interest Litigation and issued notices to the

Government of Uttar Pradesh. A copy of the said order is produced

herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-K.

26. Being aggrieved by the illegal, arbitrary, malicious, motivated,

deliberate, and wrongful actions of the Respondents, the

Petitioners herein prefers this writ Petition in the nature of Public

Interest on the following grounds.

27. The reliefs sought in the present petition are in the nature of public

interest; hence there is no alternative and efficacious remedy

except seeking relief under the extraordinary jurisdiction confirmed

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

28. These Petitioners have not filed any other petition or appeal to any

other litigation before any other court of law.

GROUNDS

29. It is submitted that the action of the Respondent is illegal, arbitrary,

malicious, and wrongful, which is a clear violation of fundamental

guarantees confirmed under the provisions of part III of the

Constitution of India. Hence interference of this Hon'ble Court is

just and necessary to mend the illegal acts of the Respondent

police to render justice to the innocent injured person.

30. It is submitted that the Respondent Police resist the FIR's on their

own complaint, and now they are continuing to investigate the

same. The allegation in the various complaint in which FIR's have

not been registered are directly against the Police officials and

policeman. In this circumstance, there can't be a fair investigation

at the hands of the Respondents police. The interest of the

injured/victim can’t be protected by the Respondent Police to

render justice without the interference of this court.

31. From the audio/video recording available and produced

hereinabove clearly discloses that the police officials have had a

clear motive with the biased intention to target one religions

community for various reasons and to satisfy the vested interest.

32. It is submitted that the action of the Respondent relating to the

violence inflicted upon people on 19.12.2019 and thereafter is in

clear violation of Article 19(1), 20, and 21 of the Constitution of

India.

33. It is submitted that the action of Respondent No. 3 and the police

authorities have clearly violated the rights of the citizens

guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) & (b) of the Constitution of India

by committing uninitiated atrocious violence against people and

thereafter registering FIR against them.

34. It is submitted that the action of the Respondent shows malice,

and such action is a perverse implementation of their duty as

Police and the provisions of Cr.P.C., and I.P.C.

35. It is submitted that the action of the Police in respect of the incident

dated 19.12.2019 at Mangalore city is unmitigated excessive use

of force against unarmed peaceful protesters. Since the

Respondent Police had sufficient knowledge regarding the

possible gathering, which is evident from the prohibitory order

issued by Respondent No. 3, produced hereinabove.

36. It is submitted that the High Courts and Supreme Court of India

have laid down three essential pre-conditions before ordering for

the use of force to disperse a crowd. They are: (1) there is an

unlawful assembly with an object of committing violence or likely

to cause disturbance to public peace (2) Executive Magistrate

must order for the unlawful assembly to disperse. (3) In spite of

such orders, the people do not move away.

37. It has also been held that on the one hand, law and order need to

be restored, but at the same time, it is also to be ensured that

unnecessary force or the force that is beyond what is absolutely

essential is not used.

38. It has also been observed by that Supreme Court that use of police

force, in cases of controlling people in unlawful assembly,

becomes a serious problem when taking recourse to such an

action, police indulges in excesses and crosses the limit by using

excessive force thereby becoming barbaric or by not halting ever

after controlling the situation and continuing its tirade. This results

in a violation of human rights and human dignity. In the instant

case on hand, the fact that the Respondent Police have acted in

excess to their lawful power and crossing the legal jurisdiction

fixed under the prevailing law of the land.

39. It has also been held that the primary task of the state is to ensure

the safety and security to all its citizens without violating human

dignity. Powers conferred upon the statutory authorities have to

be, perforce, admitted. Nonetheless, the very essence of

constitutionalism is that no organ of the State may arrogate to itself

powers beyond what is specified in the Constitution. In the instant

case, it can be seen from the video and audio which have been

marked hereinabove clearly discloses that the police have

exceeded their jurisdiction and acted predetermined by targeting

one religious community.

40. It has also been held that wherever the Court applies the test of

“proximate and direct nexus with the expression," the court also

has to keep in mind that the restriction should be founded on the

principle of least invasiveness i.e., the restriction should be

imposed in a manner and to the extent which is unavoidable in a

given situation. The Court would also take into consideration

whether the anticipated event would or would not be intrinsically

dangerous to the public interest. But nothing has been reflected

from the order of Section 144 of Cr.P.C.

41. It is submitted that the incident that has taken place on 19.12.2019

is a case of extrajudicial killing by police, especially when innocent

persons have died. Thus, investigation in these cases are required

to follow the procedures laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

of India.

42. It is submitted that FIR No. 133/2019 wherein Sl. No. 3 and Sl. No.

8 of the list of accused names the persons who were deceased by

the gunfire of the police is contrary to the directions issued by the

National Human Rights Commission on 29.3.1997, subsequently

revised on 12.5.2010, which is recommended to be followed by all

States/UT in country and has been confirmed by various Hon’ble

High Courts of India. The Petitioner craves leave of the produce

the relevant orders/directions at the time of the hearing.

43. It is submitted that the subsequent FIR registered under various

sections of IPC, including section 124A based on complaints made

by police officers indicate that the Police authorities have

proactively targeted persons who have only exercised their

fundamental rights by dissenting against the Citizen Amendment

Act, 2019.

44. It is submitted that FIR No. 142/2019 to FIR No. 147/2019,

produced herewith this writ petition, has alleged that subsequent

to the protest, incendiary comments have been made in social

media platforms. In this regard, it is submitted that the language of

the said complaints as contained in the FIR indicates the biases

against the one particular community, especially since the

complainants in all the FIR aforementioned are police officers.

Furthermore, it is pertinent to mention that no further incident of

violence has occurred post 19.12.2019 at Mangalore.

45. It is submitted that the Supreme Court of India has laid down that

there are three concepts that are fundamental in understanding

the reach of this most basic of human rights i.e., freedom of speech

and expression. The first is the discussion, the second is

advocacy, and the third is incitement. Mere discussion or even

advocacy of a particular cause howsoever unpopular is at the

heart of Article 19(1)(a). It is only when such discussion or

advocacy reaches the level of incitement that Section 124 (A) is

attracted. Though no such incidents have happened, the

Respondent police have booked various FIR's under Section

124(A) of IPC.

46. It is submitted that video footages and media reports both indicate

that the protestors were peaceful and unarmed on that day and

there was no need to use the force which was inflicted upon

innocent people moving in the vicinity which has been ended in

causing serious injuries to people and also causing death of two

innocent persons due to the lathi charge and gunfire.

47. It is submitted that complaints made against the police have not

been registered as FIR, and the police authorities have issued an

endorsement towards some complaints, which are produced

herewith this writ petition, which is contrary to the law as held by

the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka.

48. It is submitted that various people who are witness to the incident

are not in a position to depose since they are under the fear that

they may be implicated in series of the FIR registered by the

respondent police.

49. It is submitted that since the police had taken an active role in the

commission of a crime against the section of people which reflect

from the FIR resisted by the Respondent Police, the investigation

will not be fair and just in the hands of the Respondents.

50. It is submitted that the subsequent actions of the police indicate

malice and intention to suppress freedom of speech and

expression by resorting to illegal and draconian measures.

51. It is submitted that the present situation warrants investigation

through a Special Investigation Team under the supervision of the

Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the interest of justice as the

current situation.

GROUNDS FOR INTERIM RELIEF

52. It is submitted that the present investigation is in the hands of the

local police against whom serious allegation and complaints have

been filed may do things and destroy the digital evidence available

in order to protect them.

53. It is submitted that various allegations are against the Respondent

police, and there is every chance that they will destroy the

available digital evidence in order to protect themselves in order to

screen themselves from criminal prosecution.

54. It is submitted that several other CCTV cameras which are affixed

at public places, by the Private People and City Police and City

administration as mandated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of

India, have also recorded the incident and various journalists who

were present also recorded the incident which are instrumental

evidence for fair and just investigations which would determine the

truth, are also required to be preserved for investigation.

55. Police stations are required to have surveillance of CCTV cameras

as per the direction of the Supreme Court of India, which would

reveal the brutality and torture inflicted upon persons in custody of

the police.

PRAYER

The Petitioner humbly submits that in light of the facts and

circumstances mentioned hereinabove and in light of the Grounds set

out in this petition the Petitioner humbly prays before the Hon’ble High

Court of Karnataka and Your Lordships may be pleased to

(a) Issue writ of mandamus to Respondent No-3 to register the

First Information Report in all the Compliant received from

various injured persons and family members of deceased under

appropriate provision of law.

(b) Issues Writ of Mandamus in the nature of Direction to

Respondent No-1 to take necessary steps to constitute a

Special Investigation Team consisting of senior reputed Police

officers headed by not below the rank of Additional Director of

General Police officer to investigate into the FIR which resisted

for the incident dated 19.12.2019 at Mangalore, under the direct

supervision of this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice and

equity.

(c) Pass any other order in the interest of justice and equity.

INTERIM PRAYER

Pending disposal of the above writ petition and in order to meet

the efficacy of the above writ petition issue following interim

directions;

a) Direct the Respondent No-3 register the First Information

Report in all the Compliant received from various injured

persons and family members of the deceased under

appropriate provision of law.

b) Direct the Respondent No-3 to preserve the footages of the

CCTV camera from 19.12.2019 from 10 AM to 1 am on

20.12.2019 from all the CCTV potage installed by the

Respondent Police, City administration and the private

shoppers who have installed in the places where the

incident took place.

c) Direct the Respondent to collect the video recording done

by the Police and the journalists who were present at the

time of the incident.

Place: Bangalore

Date: Advocate for the Petitioner